19 Fulton Street, Suite 407

New York, NY 10038

tel: (212) 807-6222
fax: (212) 807-6245
e-mail: ncac @ncac.org
web: www.ncac.org

Joan E. Bertin
Executive Director

NCAC PARTICIPATING
ORGANIZATIONS
Actors Equity Association
American Association of
School Administrators
American Association of

University Professors
American Association of
University Women

American Booksellers

for Free Expression

American Civil Liberties Union
American Ethical Union
American Federation of Teachers
American Jewish Committee
American Library Association
American Literary Translators

Chancellor Bob Meyer

University of Wisconsin-Stout
712 South Broadway
325 Administration Building
Menomonie, WI 54751
meyerb@uwstout.edu

Association
American Orthopsychiatric Association
American Society of Journalists
& Authors
Americans United for Separation of
Church & State
Association of American Publishers
Authors Guild
Catholics for Choice
Childrens Literature Association

Dear Chancellor Meyer,

The National Coalition Against Censorship (NCAC), founded in 1974, is an
alliance of over 50 national non-profit organizations, including literary, artistic,
religious, educational, professional, labor, and civil liberties groups dedicated to
promoting the right to free speech. The Foundation for Individual Rights in
Education (FIRE) unites leaders in the fields of civil rights and civil liberties,
scholars, journalists, and public intellectuals across the political and ideological
spectrum on behalf of liberty, legal equality, academic freedom, due process,
freedom of speech, and freedom of conscience on Americas college campuses.

College Art Association

Comic Book Legal Defense Fund
The Creative Coalition
Directors Guild of America
Dramatists Guild of America
First Amendment Lawyers Association
International Reading Association
Lambda Legal
Modern Language Association
National Center for Science Education
National Communication Association
National Council for the Social Studies
National Council of Churches
National Council of Jewish Women
National Council of Teachers of English

As organizations committed to free speech principles, we write to the University of

Wisconsin-Stout to express our deep concern about the proposal to remove two
recently restored 193536 paintings by Cal Peters from Harvey Hall and place
them in storage. In justifying the removal, you have argued that the works may
have a harmful effect on students and other viewers.

National Education Association

National Youth Rights Association
The Newspaper Guild/CWA
PEN American Center
People for the American Way
Planned Parenthood Federation
of America
Project Censored
SAG-AFTRA

It is our understanding that the call to remove the paintingswhich have clear
historical and educational valuecame from individual students as well as from
the universitys Diversity Leadership Team (DLT). It is also our understanding
that the DLT has claimed that the depictions of First Nations peoples in the works
reinforce racial stereotypes and promote acts of domination and oppression.

Sexuality Information & Education

Council of the U.S.
Society of Childrens Book Writers
& Illustrators
Student Press Law Center
Union for Reform Judaism
Union of Democratic Intellectuals
Unitarian Universalist Association
United Church of Christ

Individuals respond to expressionincluding verbal and visual representationin subjective

a
Office of Communication
United Methodist Church
United Methodist Communications
Womens American ORT
Woodhull Sexual Freedom Alliance
Writers Guild of America, East
Writers Guild of America, West

unpredictable ways. Any effect speech may have upon its audience is necessarily contingent
upon an observers individual experiences and beliefs. Beauty, and all else, is always in the eye
of the beholder. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit has identified this subjective
process as mental intermediation, noting that almost all cultural stimuli provoke unconscious
responses. American Booksellers Assoc. v. Hudnut, 771 F.2d 323, 329, 330 (7th Cir. 1985),
affd, 475 U.S. 1001 (1986). In Hudnut, the Seventh Circuitthe jurisdiction of which includes
Wisconsinanswered arguments in support of a statutory prohibition on pornography that
mirror those advanced by DLT here. In upholding First Amendment protection for
pornographic images said to demean women, the court observed:
Racial bigotry, anti-Semitism, violence on television, reporters biases these
and many more influence the culture and shape our socialization. Yet all is
protected as speech, however insidious. Any other answer leaves the government
in control of all of the institutions of culture, the great censor and director of
which thoughts are good for us.
Id. at 330. Hudnut and other cases establish that state officials, including employees of state
universities, may not constitutionally suppress expression solely because it is subjectively
harmful or offensive. See, e.g., Snyder v. Phelps, 131 S. Ct. 1207, 1220 (2011) (As a Nation we
have chosen ... to protect even hurtful speech on public issues to ensure that we do not stifle
public debate.); UWM Post, Inc. v. Bd. of Regents of Univ. of Wis. Sys., 774 F. Supp. 1163 (E.D.
Wis. 1991) (ruling that policy prohibiting discriminatory epithets was overbroad and vague).
The few studies the DLT has offered in support of its claim that Native Americans who witness
stereotypical media depictions of other Native Americans suffer adverse psychological
consequences, such as decreased self-esteem, are limited in scope and focus on mascots and
mass media representations rather than historical paintings. The findings are neither definitive
nor applicable to the artwork in question.
Of course, speech does have effects. Expression may cause offense and pain, or reinforce or
undermine values and beliefs. But First Amendment protections are needed precisely for this
reason. If all speech some found uncomfortable or disturbing were to be suppressed, public
discussion and debate would be radically impoverished and open conversation about beliefs and
values would be imperiled.
Such dialogue is especially important at a university, the quintessential marketplace of ideas.
A public university fails its educational mission when it eliminates material because some
members of its community consider it offensive or objectionable. Such a paternalistic response
from the university impinges on the academic freedom of the faculty and denies students
important learning opportunities.
Popular attitudes held by Americans in the 1930s differ from contemporary viewsand,
accordingly, are of historical significance. Conversations about history are not just conversations
about what happened; they are also conversations about how we talk about what happened. Cal
Peters work invites reflection on the politics of historical memory and presents a valuable
educational opportunity. Substantive dialogue across the divides of racial misapprehension,

anxiety, and pain will demand courage, imagination, dedication and perseverance. Putting Cal
Peters 1930s paintings in a closet ends the conversation prematurely and to the detriment of
current and future students and faculty.
We support the DLTs proposal to convene a symposium or working group to discuss the issue
of how to handle objections to historical murals and paintings. Such a conversation could have
national significance, as many public officials and universities are currently grappling with
similar questions. The university could take a leadership role by helping to develop best practices
and procedures that acknowledge the legitimate concerns of groups who feel marginalized by
historical representations while preserving their availability for future study, discussion, critique,
and debate. We would be happy to assist in facilitating such a conversation.
We strongly urge the University of Wisconsin-Stouta public institution bound by the First
Amendmentto keep the Cal Peters paintings on display as both historically important artifacts
and teaching tools. To facilitate an open discussion about these works, we recommend that you
provide an opportunity for observers to describe their reactions in writingperhaps in a nearby
notebookand that you consider sponsoring workshops and the display of other work that
provides different perspectives.
Removing representations of historically oppressed groups from view will not change the facts
of history. Instead, more representations, more voices, and more conversations are needed. We
ask that you trust your faculty and students to answer that challenge.
We look forward to your response.

Svetlana Mintcheva, Director of Programs

National Coalition Against Censorship

Will Creeley, Vice President of Legal and Public Advocacy

Foundation for Individual Rights in Education
cc:
Doug Mell, Executive Director of University Communications and External
Relations (melld@uwstout.edu)
Regina Millner, University of Wisconsin System Board of Regents President
(rmmillner@uwalumni.com)